I keep confusing myself.. help me choose! 3 stone options...

[angeline]

Hi all,

Well here''s the story so far. I have in my possession a 1.57 D VS1 (7.5mm) and 2 x .77ct each F SI1''s (5.9mm each) with the idea of doing a three stone. Oh all are rounds. They are also all WF Expert Selection stones.

My ring size is 6.25 and I really want as much finger coverage as possible. I tried this combo in Tiffs and it doesn''t quite cover my finger top. I am also torn becaue I do love a solitaire. Yes I have no idea what I really want and I think Katie at WF is (or should) be ready to jump down the phone and punch me.

So my question is:

Option 1: Tradeup the center for a 2.02ct G SI1 at 8.1mm and keep the sides to do the 3-stone. Would this muck up the proportions?
Option 2: Trade all 3 for an ACA 2.3ct G SI1 at 8.56mm and do a solitaire. Couldn''t afford a blingy band if I do this.
Option 3: Keep all three and get a blingy wedding band.

Please help me sort out my brain! What would you do?

p.s. It''s a 10 year anniversary ring but I would wear it like an e-ring with a band.

Thanks!

a

 

[JulieN]

i vote for 1

 

[Lorelei]

As I am all about a big rock, then I would vote for 2!!

 

[iheartscience]

I vote for number 2 also! That''s a rock and a half right there! Yum! You can always get some more sidestones or a blingy band later!

 

[ericad]

Do you like halo styles? #2 set in a halo would cover a lot of square footage and could be paired with a plain, less expensive band.

 

[Kasey3]

Hi Angeline,

Do you already have a solitare? I am really confused because I thought you recently got an upgrade on your 2ct. stone? Has that one been traded in for these stones?

OK-
Plan A: If you still have the 2ct, then I say go ahead with your original three stone idea. I have a LM three stone and it sits very low-it almost covers my finger. When I tried on other settings that were not as low it it did not, so maybe it was the style of the ring.


Plan B: If this will be your only ring, then I say go for the large solitare and save up for a three stone for your next big anniversary. A blingy band can easily be added for a combo gift like: b-day + December holiday + mother''s day + ect.

Plan C: Large diamond + Leon Mege 3-stone with bullets and a plan band. I love this combo and I think you will accomplish your finger coverage.

 

[treysar]

I would be a size hoe and choose one, this way in a few years you can add even bigger side stones if you still desire a 3 stone.Plus, I think a huge solitaire with a small simple eternity band is totally gorgeous.

As for option 1, a friend of mine has a large center with small sides, all rounds, and I think it’s a total KNOCKOUT – I love the proportions of smaller sides with a bigger center – really makes that center stone POP!
J Can’t wait to see the result!

 

[angeline]

Thanks all for your responses.

Kasey - sorry for the confusion, as I said I''m confused! I upgraded my 2.1ct F SI2 cos I wasn''t happy with the clarity and got the 1.57 D VS. Then I thought of the three stone and got the sides cos the 1.57 was looking a little small LOL! So that''s where I am now.

It''s interesting that no-one voted #3.

 

[angeline]

Date: 8/6/2007 10:00:49 AM
Author: ericad
Do you like halo styles? #2 set in a halo would cover a lot of square footage and could be paired with a plain, less expensive band.

ericad - I couldn''t afford a halo and do #2. It would have to be a simple setting until, like 2009, cos I"m using all my jewlery credit with dh up fast!

 

[angeline]

Date: 8/6/2007 10:07:53 AM
Author: Kasey3
Hi Angeline,


Do you already have a solitare? I am really confused because I thought you recently got an upgrade on your 2ct. stone? Has that one been traded in for these stones?


OK-

Plan A: If you still have the 2ct, then I say go ahead with your original three stone idea. I have a LM three stone and it sits very low-it almost covers my finger. When I tried on other settings that were not as low it it did not, so maybe it was the style of the ring.



Plan B: If this will be your only ring, then I say go for the large solitare and save up for a three stone for your next big anniversary. A blingy band can easily be added for a combo gift like: b-day + December holiday + mother''s day + ect.


Plan C: Large diamond + Leon Mege 3-stone with bullets and a plan band. I love this combo and I think you will accomplish your finger coverage.

Kasey, I like your thinkking! Just that dh wouldn''t methinks.. This is it forever in his mind but I''ve been known to change his mind upon occasion

I would love your plan C but again, I would use up all allocated upgrade cash just trading for the 2.32.

 

[angeline]

Date: 8/6/2007 10:13:42 AM
Author: treysar
I would be a size hoe and choose one, this way in a few years you can add even bigger side stones if you still desire a 3 stone.Plus, I think a huge solitaire with a small simple eternity band is totally gorgeous.


As for option 1, a friend of mine has a large center with small sides, all rounds, and I think it’s a total KNOCKOUT – I love the proportions of smaller sides with a bigger center – really makes that center stone POP!

J Can’t wait to see the result!

Thanks treysar for the insight. I chose the sides based on the1.57 so I was a little worried that it might look off with a bigger center.

 

[Kasey3]

Date: 8/6/2007 11:18:33 AM
Author: angeline
Thanks all for your responses.

Kasey - sorry for the confusion, as I said I''m confused! I upgraded my 2.1ct F SI2 cos I wasn''t happy with the clarity and got the 1.57 D VS. Then I thought of the three stone and got the sides cos the 1.57 was looking a little small LOL! So that''s where I am now.

It''s interesting that no-one voted #3.

OK I get it now. I say upgrade to the larger stone. You said that you love a solitaire, and I would imagine that size wise once you have been sporting a 2ct it must be hard to go down in size. Also, a 3 stone is a very different look, beautiful yes absolutely, but different than a honkin solitare.

As I said, I have a RB 3-stone and I love it. It does accomplish the finger of bling look-but I lust after a 2ct + solitare and I miss the solitare wedding band look. If it were me, I would get the large stone. There will always be time to get a 3stone RHR in the future.

 

[angeline]

thing2, Lorelei and JulieN, thanks for your input. I think it stands at about 4 or 5 for #2 option (with some embellishments even!) and 1 for #1. Interesting...

Unfortunately dh is kinda keen on the 3-stone idea, although he does want me to be happy with whatever I decide. I''m just so hopeless and change my mind every 2 minutes. Every time I tell him I''ve decided he just shakes his head.... (in a funny way).

I will definitely keep you posted. I think you PS''ers deserve some sort of pic at some point from me. I''ve been through a few stones and 1 Mark Morrell and not posted anything because I''ve never been convinced that I was satisfied with the stone.

dh want''s to know where the support group website for husbands of us PS''ers is

 

[angeline]

Date: 8/6/2007 11:35:37 AM
Author: Kasey3

Date: 8/6/2007 11:18:33 AM

Author: angeline

Thanks all for your responses.


Kasey - sorry for the confusion, as I said I''m confused! I upgraded my 2.1ct F SI2 cos I wasn''t happy with the clarity and got the 1.57 D VS. Then I thought of the three stone and got the sides cos the 1.57 was looking a little small LOL! So that''s where I am now.


It''s interesting that no-one voted #3.

OK I get it now. I say upgrade to the larger stone. You said that you love a solitaire, and I would imagine that size wise once you have been sporting a 2ct it must be hard to go down in size. Also, a 3 stone is a very different look, beautiful yes absolutely, but different than a honkin solitare.


As I said, I have a RB 3-stone and I love it. It does accomplish the finger of bling look-but I lust after a 2ct + solitare and I miss the solitare wedding band look. If it were me, I would get the large stone. There will always be time to get a 3stone RHR in the future.

Kasey - where is your 3-stone? do you have a link to it? I probably have seen it as I hav e combed the boards but I''m not sure. I was interested in how Leon does the gallery in his all rounds 3-stones.

I''m just so torn! I''m blancing my love of ''finger of bling'' (LOL) with the glamour of a honkinsolitaire with wanting to make dh happy because he would really like the 3-stone. arrgghhh. I was just on the phone to katie at WF, waffling for half an hour. She has the patience of a saint. The larger G is eye-clean from 10 inches which I think is good enough for me.

I''m off to hunt for your 3-sone.

a

 

[Kasey3]

Date: 8/6/2007 12:46:36 PM
Author: angeline

Date: 8/6/2007 11:35:37 AM
Author: Kasey3

Date: 8/6/2007 11:18:33 AM

Author: angeline

Thanks all for your responses.


Kasey - sorry for the confusion, as I said I''m confused! I upgraded my 2.1ct F SI2 cos I wasn''t happy with the clarity and got the 1.57 D VS. Then I thought of the three stone and got the sides cos the 1.57 was looking a little small LOL! So that''s where I am now.


It''s interesting that no-one voted #3.

OK I get it now. I say upgrade to the larger stone. You said that you love a solitaire, and I would imagine that size wise once you have been sporting a 2ct it must be hard to go down in size. Also, a 3 stone is a very different look, beautiful yes absolutely, but different than a honkin solitare.


As I said, I have a RB 3-stone and I love it. It does accomplish the finger of bling look-but I lust after a 2ct + solitare and I miss the solitare wedding band look. If it were me, I would get the large stone. There will always be time to get a 3stone RHR in the future.

Kasey - where is your 3-stone? do you have a link to it? I probably have seen it as I hav e combed the boards but I''m not sure. I was interested in how Leon does the gallery in his all rounds 3-stones.

I''m just so torn! I''m blancing my love of ''finger of bling'' (LOL) with the glamour of a honkinsolitaire with wanting to make dh happy because he would really like the 3-stone. arrgghhh. I was just on the phone to katie at WF, waffling for half an hour. She has the patience of a saint. The larger G is eye-clean from 10 inches which I think is good enough for me.

I''m off to hunt for your 3-sone.

a

Angeline-I did not post any pics as I have not been able to figue out how to shrink them down to an acceptable size for PS. I will give it another try -just for you!!!-this afternoon but I can''t be sure if I will be able to.

The basket on each of the three stones is exactly like the one on Kristydarling''s-and they fit together perfectly with no gap between the baskets. From the top, all you can see are diamonds-no metal at all and the prongs are barely noticable. It truly gives the look of finger of bling. If you go for a three stone I would get a Leon.

Also, I know exactly how you feel about wanting your DH to be happy too. AND I know how hard it is to decide. Just remember you will be the one looking at it everyday (numerous times a day!!!) and he will be happy if you are happy!

 

[angeline]

Well I did it. I called WF and told them I want the 2.32ct. I guess I feel I need to see it and make a decision from there. I hope the color is okay, and that I can''t see the inclusions. WF said it is eye-clean from 10 inches. Not eye-clean at 3 inches, but I seriously can''t focus any closer than 10 or 12 inches anyway! LOL

 

[Kasey3]

Congratulations!!! I bet you won''t notice the color at all. Are you color sensitive?

I know that I am. I have a G (pendant), and my three stone is an E center with F side stones and I can see the subtle color difference between the E and F''s I never thought it was possible but I can unfortunately, and if I compare the G with the others I can tell the difference of course. But, completely on its own the G is beautiful and has no color at all-I can only see the color in a side by side comparison with the E and F''s so don''t compare-just evaluate it on its own. I am sure you will love it. My next rock is going to be a G. (I want to go with an H or an I to save $$$, but I don''t think I will be able to)

I hope this G just blows you away!!! and it will be bigger that the 2ct you started with so yeah!!!

 

[angeline]

Date: 8/6/2007 5:29:32 PM
Author: Kasey3
Congratulations!!! I bet you won''t notice the color at all. Are you color sensitive?


I know that I am. I have a G (pendant), and my three stone is an E center with F side stones and I can see the subtle color difference between the E and F''s I never thought it was possible but I can unfortunately, and if I compare the G with the others I can tell the difference of course. But, completely on its own the G is beautiful and has no color at all-I can only see the color in a side by side comparison with the E and F''s so don''t compare-just evaluate it on its own. I am sure you will love it. My next rock is going to be a G. (I want to go with an H or an I to save $$$, but I don''t think I will be able to)


I hope this G just blows you away!!! and it will be bigger that the 2ct you started with so yeah!!!

Thanks Kasey! I am a bit color sensitive, but I have only ever seen D, E, F and I. The I just wasn''t going to work for me unfortunately. I am hoping the G is fine. I am sure it will be.

Wow good eyes spotting the difference between E and F! Annoying though really LOL

I should have it Wednesday so I will report back!

a

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Hi, A, I was just catching up on your latest news! Does this mean you have decided against VC? I haven''t done anything either, speaking of indecision!!! I''d love to have your D VS1 stone, but I understand if you were used to a 2 ct. stone. AS far as the other stone goes, I still prefer a solitaire unless there are small sidestones such as pears. I''d try to find a VS2, though, if it was me. I''ll be interested to hear what you choose!!!

 

[angeline]

Date: 8/6/2007 8:28:38 PM
Author: diamondseeker2006
Hi, A, I was just catching up on your latest news! Does this mean you have decided against VC? I haven''t done anything either, speaking of indecision!!! I''d love to have your D VS1 stone, but I understand if you were used to a 2 ct. stone. AS far as the other stone goes, I still prefer a solitaire unless there are small sidestones such as pears. I''d try to find a VS2, though, if it was me. I''ll be interested to hear what you choose!!!

DS I am truly hopeless. I fall in love, then I fall in love with something new, then, then, then.... The setting I wanted from VC ended up being about 4500 for both rings which isn''t too bad I guess but as time went on and I kept reading PS I thought ''Hmmmmm...'' that 2ct sure was nice! put the 4500 towards a bigger stone with a simple setting. In an ideal world (as it would be for most PS''ers I would guess) we would all have 6 or 7 sets of different styles.

So it all escalated from there, with my dh getting in on it and reeeeeally wanting a 3-stone. So I get the sides and vacillate on settings for another while then decide that really I don''t think I am a 3-stone gal. I don''t think I ever was but dh is so in love with them. And it made me happy to make him happy (at least for a little whle LOL). By now the return period for the sides is over so to get a solitaire I''m trading all 3 stones. Whew!

I would love a VS stone, but it seems to take forever to get new stock into WF. I don''t know when the next lot will be in. I just want a ring already!

I''ll take a look when I get it and see how the clarity is. And the color. I loved that D VS, it was such a beautiful stone. If only it was a smidge larger. Or if only I hadn''t bought the sides. I just don''t want to use them as earrings I want a kick-a$$ ring. Which is why I''m trading all 3 now. Sigh.

It gets complicated doesn''t it.

I will let you know how it all goes... How is your search progressing?

a

 

[ladyl]

Hi Angeline!
Sorry, this might be a bit off topic, did you decide to select a SI1 this time because you were ''bugged'' by your previous F SI2 diamond?

Cos I do have quite a sharp eye and am in the mids of deciding on your previous diamond

I''m just wondering how ''eyeclean'' it was when you had it...Were the inclusions very obvious to you or your friends? Was the diamond all nice and sparkly for you?
Sorry for all these questions, cos I can''t see this diamond in person so I''m a bit nervous

and would like your point of view since you had it for a few mths...?

Thanks So Much!

 

[angeline]

Date: 8/15/2007 12:18:33 AM
Author: ladyl
Hi Angeline!

Sorry, this might be a bit off topic, did you decide to select a SI1 this time because you were ''bugged'' by your previous F SI2 diamond?

Cos I do have quite a sharp eye and am in the mids of deciding on your previous diamond

I''m just wondering how ''eyeclean'' it was when you had it...Were the inclusions very obvious to you or your friends? Was the diamond all nice and sparkly for you?

Sorry for all these questions, cos I can''t see this diamond in person so I''m a bit nervous

and would like your point of view since you had it for a few mths...?

Thanks So Much!

ladyl - I have regretted trading this diamond so many times!!! In reality I started thinking of changing the setting I had for it which was quite thick and low because I thought it made the stone look smaller. Then I thought I wanted a bigger diamond outright. Then I thought it might be the inclusions that were bugging me but after seeing the G SI1 that I have now I have realised that I am actually reeeeeaallly color sensitive and I think my ideal is a D! I''m going to keep the G though because it''s a bit bigger than the F, and live with the tiny hint of warmth I can see for the sake of size!

So I''m not sure how to summarise all that

I could never see a thing on that stone. Bear in mind though that I am 43 years old so I don''t have the vision of a young ''un. The inclusions on the stone I have now, the 2.32 G SI1 are black and in the center and try as I might I can''t see anything. The inclusions on that stone are white and not in the center. On the magnified pic I think what you see in the center are reflections which you wouldn''t see in real life. It''s really a good value and the price they put on it is the price I paid. WF don''t take the opportunity to put the price up when they get a stone back whch is really a nice thing. It has great spread for the carat wieght too. It is very sparkly and impressive and white. No-one could ever see a thing on it. You can always get it and return it if you can see something.

I''m excited that you might get it! I''ll try to post a pic of it in my ring!

 

[angeline]

I''ll try that again a bit bigger...

 

[angeline]

They''re not very good photos I didn''t even clean the ring before I took them, I was just practicing. Anyway here''s one more..

 

[angeline]

Just wanted to add that I can''t tell any difference in the clarity between the SI1 I have now and the SI2. In fact even comparing to the VS1 I had for a short while. That could be because I have terrible eye-sight but my dh has very good close-up vision and he couldn''t see anything either. It would only be a mind-clean issue now for me.

Good luck! and let me know what you do!

a

 

[ladyl]

Thanks Soooo Much!!! I really appreciate it!

I''ll keep you updated!